Mackie VLZ vs VLZ Pro. What's the difference

[simonv]

So,

What's the difference between, let's say, a 1604vlz and a 1604vlz pro?
(not the original 1604)


I was wondering since I just bought a 1604vlz, and hadn't noticed that some boards were VLZpro and others just VLZ,

Thanks,
Simon

[code green]

Originally Posted by simonv

So,

What's the difference between, let's say, a 1604vlz and a 1604vlz pro?
(not the original 1604)


I was wondering since I just bought a 1604vlz, and hadn't noticed that some boards were VLZpro and others just VLZ,

Thanks,
Simon

-10 dBv vs. +4 dBu? i have the pro, and it may well be that the ability to conform to "pro audio" voltages is the only difference...but not being familiar with the other unit i can't say for sure....

[Sizzleboy]

Originally Posted by simonv

So,

What's the difference between, let's say, a 1604vlz and a 1604vlz pro?
(not the original 1604)


I was wondering since I just bought a 1604vlz, and hadn't noticed that some boards were VLZpro and others just VLZ,

Thanks,
Simon

The VLZpro have updated preamps.

from the mackie forum:
"The main difference is with the 1604 vlz PRO came the addition of XDR(TM)(extended dynamic range)mic preamps.You can use the XDR mic preamps at the end of extremely long cheap mic cables and not hear interference. It accepts a wider range of impedences without compromising frequency response."

Most likely, they simply raised the input impedence. I've used both, and really never noticed a difference.

By the way, the regular VLZ is just as capable using +4db balanced connections as the VLZpro.

[TonyBelmont]

Originally Posted by Sizzleboy

The VLZpro have updated preamps.

from the mackie forum:
"The main difference is with the 1604 vlz PRO came the addition of XDR(TM)(extended dynamic range)mic preamps.You can use the XDR mic preamps at the end of extremely long cheap mic cables and not hear interference. It accepts a wider range of impedences without compromising frequency response."

Most likely, they simply raised the input impedence. I've used both, and really never noticed a difference.

By the way, the regular VLZ is just as capable using +4db balanced connections as the VLZpro.

bingo!

[simonv]

Thanks Sizzleboy. I'm glad to hear that.

[cdog]

They both suck a lot harder than the Onyx series.

[simonv]

I wish I could get an Onyx, but they're just too expensive for me right now. I just need a bunch of pres and monitoring capabilities for a pre-production, so the VLZ will be just fine.


I've never used a VLZ in a professional context before, but while recording demos and such, I've always been very satisfied.

[mrface2112]

i've got a mackie 24*4 VLZ and it does the job.

it's not great, i can't push the pres very hard, they don't have a lot of character and they're noisy if you have to turn them all the way up.......but i paid $400 for the board, and i think one would be very hard-pressed to get 24 decent preamps at what, $18/channel?

not to mention all of the routing (auxes, inserts, etc), etc. just stay away from the EQ--i don't find it musical at all, and the summing amps just don't sound that great.

these days i don't use it for anything except spillover (that which can't be covered by my outboard) and for headphone sends. it's VERY nice to be able to put out 6 headphone mixes for bands tracking live, thanks to the auxes. IMO, it's paid for itself in that regard alone.

i should mention that i tap the inserts for direct outs and therefore bypass the EQ, summing amps and the rest of the garbage that the mackie boards are typically slammed for. the pres are definitely "ok".

in all, it's wholly usable.


cheers,
wade

[Acoustic Cloud]

No reason to not be able to use those for good recordings.